In the absence of specific allegation about commission of offence touching the caste, prima facie, petition filed under Sec 438 Cr.P.C. is maintainable.

JUDGMENT

Subba Reddy Satti, J. - The petitioners, A-1, A-13, A-14, A-15, A-16, A-18, A-21 and A-22, in Crime No. 85 of 2022 of Pithapuram Rural Police Station, East Godavari District, filed this Criminal Petition under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, seeking pre-arrest bail.

2. The above crime is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 323, 427 r/w 34 IPC and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, 'SC and ST Act').

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 30.04.2022 at about 01.00 A.M., about 150 persons belonging to Kapu community of Mallam Village, entered into Ambedkar Colony and quarreled with one Randa Satyanarayana and beat him with hands indiscriminately. On hearing, the complainant rushed to the spot and intervened and questioned about the issue, A-1 attacked him and beat with hands indiscriminately and abused him with caste. One of the members in mob pulled his testicles forcibly and the complainant sustained bleeding injuries. Complainant was taken to the Government General Hospital, Kakinada. Mob also attacked some houses and caused mischief due to the incident occurred in Jathara. Basing on the above incident, police registered the above crime on 30.04.2022 for the aforesaid offences.

4. Heard Sri K.B. Ramanna Dora, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Soora Venkata Sainath, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the Criminal Petition against A-1.

Therefore, insofar as the 1st petitioner, who is A-1, is concerned, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that no specific overt acts were attributed against the petitioners. Since no specific allegation was made against the petitioners with regard to either utterances or involvement in the incident when the other accused beat the complainant, the provisions of the SC and ST Act would not attract for the petitioners, for which, he relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in Prathvi Raj Chauhan vs. Union Of India (2020) 4 SCC 727.

6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the Criminal Petition and would contend that in view of the bar under Section 18 of the SC and ST Act, the present Criminal Petition seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor also would contend that in the statements recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C., the witnesses spoke about the participation petitioners and their abusing complainant and others by touching caste. Therefore, he would submit that in view of the same, the Criminal Petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submits that notice under Section 15A (3) of the SC and ST Act was served on the complainant on 15.07.2022.

7. A perusal of the complaint would indicate that nearly 150 persons belonged to one community attacked complainant. No specific overt acts were attributed against the petitioners. Against A1, specific overt act was attributed. A perusal of Sec 161 Cr.P.C. statements also do not indicate the role of petitioners in commission of the offences alleged. According to the prosecution, A-1 kicked the complainant and also pulled the testicles of the complainant forcibly and on that skin was cut and one of the testicles came out and caused heavy bleeding injury. In the absence of specific allegation about commission of offence touching the caste, prima facie, petition filed under Sec 438 Cr.P.C. is maintainable. This court granted pre arrest bail to some of the accused in the same crime in Crl.P. No. 4127 of 2022 and 3775 of 2022.

8. Therefore, in view of the fact that nothing specific was attributed against the petitioners and material part of the investigation is completed, this Court is inclined to grant anticipa